Tthis is attention grabbing and the linguistic cleverness combines the subject of the article, zoo and the idiotic reactions of the visitors, i. e. Ooooooh. The title has a subtle meaning; it has in it the mindless, moronic reactions of the visitors on seeing the animals, and the graphic design cleverly manipulates our thoughts on the critical comments on zoos. Also there are a line of animal pictures on the bottom of the page, this is to create a sense of realism through illustrations.
The sub-heading is in bold as well though it is not as large as the title, this play on words is reflected by the way that she combines her anecdote with an inverted situation, Tess Lemmon watches people watching animals. The effect of that being that it is a play on words with an element of graphic design and it makes us want to read the article and it subtly introduce the idea that she is analysing the reactions of the people, as if in a scientific way.
The quotes in bold below the sub-heading are for entertainment, she deliberately takes the most inane comments from the people that she watches and let them argue the case for her, this is called Aunt Sally she has quoted the opposition and has reiterated the quotes for her own needs, the entertainment is in fact a secondary purpose to the real purpose of summing up the attitudes to the animals that the visitors feel in the zoo and shaming them and parodying it. The last quote is the most stupid of them all and has been given its own extra space for its summing up of her views and thoughts on the subject.
The first paragraph is devoted nearly entirely to the technique of making short, sharp points, ¦ lies on a slab of concrete, stares into space, flicks its tail. People stop, make comments, then go¦ this has the effect of making us think about what the visitors do, because she has summarised what they do in one short paragraph. Exaggeration is also used (which is also called hyperbole), the tiger lies on a slab of concrete, this makes it sounds worse than it is especially as she has generalised the idea of that all the animals lie on a slab of concrete in all zoos while there may be some exceptions, this is bias.
This stresses her point of animals in a cell and lying on a slab of concrete without anything to do and living in an unnatural environment, the short sentences also leads us on to the arguments of zoos. She also uses Aunt Sally to a great effect with quoting, a good day out, this makes a point to us of her sarcasm towards the idea of going to the zoo for entertainment and a parodying subject.
She uses colloquial language, But hang on a minute¦ running around¦in our backyards, this is used to convey ideas to the reader through an easier way, the effect is, that of an friend having an conversation with you, it is used to put us at ease to seem that she can be trusted, and the language involves everyone, especially using the possessive adjective our and Were this effect in context with colloquial language is that the piece becomes avuncular and inclusive and it invites us to contribute, this makes the writer identify herself with the readers, this encourages the readers to agree with her view and to make us sympathetic to her views. She also uses a rhetorical question, Whatever is¦
in this day and age? to lead on to her arguments, this question makes us feel involved, as it seems as if she cares about our own opinions, it also adds emphasis and stresses the point that we can not allow an animal in a cage, they have the same effect as the use of directives-they make you think that the writer is talking to you personally. The exaggerated tone of the question makes us think about the point of the question and agree with her. This paragraph has a certain amount of sarcasm and Aunt Sally in it, the exaggeration in, the tiger is living it up like nobodys business.
Makes the zoo director sound bad, and the section of, saved from having to earn¦ it doesnt even have to walk anywhere. In it one can detect the sarcasm of her writing, on quoting the zoo director. The quote in itself makes the animals sounds quite like prisoners really, with their meals handed to it on a plate, and it doesnt even have to walk anywhere, the effect of that compared with the fact she hints to us about the, zoo directors office is that of the zoos using the animals as exhibits to make themselves rich.
Also the tone of, with his tongue only half way in his cheek, brings out the bad habits of the person that she has interviewed the effect of that is to present to us negative opinion of him and also the sentence has a literal meaning as well, of not meaning what you say so that the effect is she doesnt want us to take his views seriously. Also an Aunt Sally was used in describing the zoos as an, Welfare state, this suggests to us that she does not agree with the views of the zoo director and it is an irony that the zoos are described as an, welfare state.
Another Aunt Sally is used to great effect in describing her feelings to the reasons trotted out by the zoo whenever their existence is challenged. Also the words in quotations, an ambassador for the wild is there because it reinforces her opinions of zoos and their well-used phrases, as she doesnt believe them. She uses her title of, as an anthropologist¦
This gives credibility to her article and research as we think she would give an unbiased opinion, but in fact this is a trick so that we think she is not biased, but rather using the title, she hides herself and still, gives us the biased opinions under the pretence of being a scientist, having spent hours¦ She repeats herself once more as she says, watching people watching animals, this merely emphasis the point that her subject is on humans and repeating the point in the sub-headings, this is also an anecdote so that we believe in her because she has experience.
She then goes on to say her conclusions after giving us her title of an anthropologist and make her sound more reliable, she goes on to say about her opinions of zoos, it is almost a directive/imperative language as she says, no zoo can fulfil¦ no zoo can bring about¦ presents a distorted picture¦ this almost commands us to believe in her research and her conclusion. Also another important is the use of 3 words grouped together, good, bad, best in the world the good, bad, best, bit emphasises the point, it somehow strengthens and stresses the point she is making.
Another good persuasive trick used by her is to mingle fact with opinion and make it sound all like fact, in this next paragraph we see her doing just that, many of the main European zoos were founded at the beginning of the last century¦ this is all fact and now she astutely and subtly adds her opinions on that, hand in hand with the spirit of adventure¦ conquest and acquisition¦ it is no coincidence that the zoo as we know it sprang up in the colonial era¦ this makes us understand the real reasons for displaying the animals while it is still only her opinion.
This affects us on whether we believe and trust the text, she gives a lot of facts but she has hidden her opinions in the form of fact among the facts, so we would tend to believe her, she uses opinions based on facts while giving facts as examples to illustrate her point. To further the readability of her article, colloquial language is used to simplify the language barrier between the grammatically correct English and her colloquialism so that it is easier to read and to digest the information, these days¦
gawp a rhetorical question is used, so what do the zoos do? this is colloquial language with rhetorical question working at the same time. The answer has sarcasm built in, she hypes what the zoos say they do, serious scientific research¦ total commitment to conservation¦ vital role as educators¦ then she dashes it all to pieces with 2 sharp points, they go to see the animals-and to be entertained.
The effect of that is to drag down the zoos lofty ideals so that she can now put her argument to use with the subject now, of why we need zoos, this is divide and conqueror, she uses a linked process of arguments and then one by one she moves on to another stage and to convince us in the end to her beliefs. Another rhetorical question, Just what do people see when they look at an animal in a zoo? this time it is all in a paragraph of its own, this is so, so that we would have time to reflect on the question before she goes on to one of her main arguments.
We then see the use of inclusive language, were¦ most of us¦ we¦ tell us this language includes us and therefore more closer to the authors thoughts and we would believe it more as the argument appeals to us as the reader. In the next paragraph, we see emotive language been used, harmful¦ stripped¦ torn away¦ reduced it to be an object to be observed, the emotive language used appeals to our heartstrings and it arouses strong feelings within us, to do something to stop the suffering.